Received: by 2002:a25:1985:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 127csp783120ybz; Fri, 1 May 2020 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypI9klFrZmQ7fmEiJ7VcD00tUUGtNj2EhEq548aLcQZZyfHEGQdo3FjsZHuC2gJCuOnGUJ2e X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:9450:: with SMTP id z16mr3597729ejx.166.1588346880801; Fri, 01 May 2020 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1588346880; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=SX2c3eVEfjMY5MelJEVjD5vJHGRHI1fRYLGTmUj6KPpKC2FiQATxr+xW7oeBlgZTXT QOwBjqJBFJssqILWisavaOD2CbreK8L9/DhrnGYb1bl45i6mN27vI1Yjl0v5bijTKgst /HBGgLB/3t56uM63wN5so0K63su6yjCpnmbOGxnd0b5JFC1ktWiufldn/2tMMoM9D6Di TgZPCWK3wKaUCfEcrDutwWIuymiUbEx4vE1YG0I8CYvQiYh9z+4KM4jSKSva4tLJSgTM kqzCW+AwaZs1mdbNdmIKnnXivVGXadcbud0cJL8POfI9oCJEm9UTAjzcUu3arESNYaBq LWmg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=pruxghx0PhBQtypSWxdQCIP/B+gUVS1zryqER4/n/Dg=; b=c89TrOna8rhLIfCvWPOp0dGZQ4A6+mQzyv4Vuq1XD2egHG0px29qONXtWBSAAsZQjh XKUNXQH6ewMcRKbaHzBV+gBVmRcOcsfuZF4VFtrubEWiH81ZEcz4vopFUh8S1UlFzxOB ECLOt6svFIHfk5uPnDn0JrfmINn6VymBGDRhuULrlsldRmYg4yX1dr/GYqtgR7NSCTaq lN/q12tCCkDZgtk3rcigQ6zorH4sKqggaRJhC0nlWvVYs+0Z4x0jE1rUNm6SPbLa5lq5 hZ09BHk2gsWyY3COLtGL5icPMcmvCWIJcG6zf99wFdAp5dd/x/hTVUZjl/f+1e+xYqTF n8oQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e7si1842224ejq.15.2020.05.01.08.27.37; Fri, 01 May 2020 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729065AbgEAP0N (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 1 May 2020 11:26:13 -0400 Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com ([185.176.76.210]:2145 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728443AbgEAP0N (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 May 2020 11:26:13 -0400 Received: from lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 0D367C3A7F7E74A2CE70; Fri, 1 May 2020 16:26:11 +0100 (IST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.47.3.165) by lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Fri, 1 May 2020 16:26:10 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] arm/arm64: smccc: Add ARCH_SOC_ID support To: Sudeep Holla , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" CC: Mark Rutland , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Catalin Marinas , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Steven Price , "harb@amperecomputing.com" , Will Deacon References: <20200430114814.14116-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20200430114814.14116-6-sudeep.holla@arm.com> From: John Garry Message-ID: <426ff8ab-9c13-4301-a91e-989c19c4ff58@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 16:25:27 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200430114814.14116-6-sudeep.holla@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.47.3.165] X-ClientProxiedBy: lhreml727-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.78) To lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 30/04/2020 12:48, Sudeep Holla wrote: > +static int __init smccc_soc_init(void) > +{ > + struct device *dev; > + int ret, soc_id_rev; > + struct arm_smccc_res res; > + static char soc_id_str[8], soc_id_rev_str[12]; > + > + if (arm_smccc_get_version() < ARM_SMCCC_VERSION_1_2) > + return 0; > + > + ret = smccc_soc_id_support_check(); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_ARCH_SOC_ID, 0, &res); > + > + ret = smccc_map_error_codes(res.a0); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + soc_id_version = res.a0; > + > + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(ARM_SMCCC_ARCH_SOC_ID, 1, &res); > + > + ret = smccc_map_error_codes(res.a0); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + soc_id_rev = res.a0; > + > + soc_dev_attr = kzalloc(sizeof(*soc_dev_attr), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!soc_dev_attr) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + sprintf(soc_id_str, "0x%04x", IMP_DEF_SOC_ID(soc_id_version)); > + sprintf(soc_id_rev_str, "0x%08x", soc_id_rev); > + > + soc_dev_attr->soc_id = soc_id_str; > + soc_dev_attr->revision = soc_id_rev_str; > + > + soc_dev = soc_device_register(soc_dev_attr); > + if (IS_ERR(soc_dev)) { > + ret = PTR_ERR(soc_dev); > + goto free_soc; > + } > + > + dev = soc_device_to_device(soc_dev); > + Just wondering, what about if the platform already had a SoC driver - now it could have another one, such that we may have multiple sysfs soc devices, right? Thanks, John > + ret = devm_device_add_groups(dev, jep106_id_groups); > + if (ret) { > + dev_err(dev, "sysfs create failed: %d\n", ret); > + goto unregister_soc; > + } > + > + pr_info("SMCCC SoC ID: %s Revision %s\n", soc_dev_attr->soc_id, > + soc_dev_attr->revision); > + > + return 0;